Why I love science/math, and the humanities annoy me

[got tonkaed]

I'd argue that your ability to empirically verify that add-on statement is negligible at best.

id argue id be off to a decent start beginning with your response.

pow.

[Gregrios]

Just because they effect eachother, doesn't mean that they don't work in wholly different ways.

The scientific method is more or less the same thing as the artistic method, just more specifically defined by the community that has shaped it's rules.

Definitely gotta disagree here!

Art is about creating ... anything from nothing. To be seen, you have to have some knowledge of how stuff works, but it is a free discovery process.

I take it then that you are not a professional artist. Nor is Ditocoaf. While many different artists will tell you many different things, most of them just don't want to pull away the curtain to reveal the wizard.

There is a method to creating work, and there is a very definite method for distilling quality out of one's work.

There are plenty of unsuccessful and horrible artists who don't understand that.

I agree. Take a creative writer for instance. There is the right way and there are many wrong ways. For a creative story to be successful, there are certain methods to which the writer must exercise inorder that people will read past the first page. As for other arts, I have no idea.

[F1fth]

I'd say that art and science are fundamentally different things. While they may have a few things in common (mostly relating to human nature), there are certain things in math/science that are necessarily true (to the best of our knowledge) which I think is what Dito appreciates about them.

For example, two plus two will always equal four, the sum of the areas of the two squares on the legs of a right angle triangle always equals the area of the square on the hypotenuse, and a hydrogen atom will always have one proton.

This is not the case with art. We cannot absolutely define any one thing as beautiful or good or tragic. It all depends, and what it almost completely depends on is human emotion and thought.

But once again, two plus two will equal four no matter what we think. That's what make the two different.

[Neoteny]

I'd argue that your ability to empirically verify that add-on statement is negligible at best.

id argue id be off to a decent start beginning with your response.

pow.

It burns.

[PLAYER57832]

I'd say that art and science are fundamentally different things. While they may have a few things in common (mostly relating to human nature), there are certain things in math/science that are necessarily true (to the best of our knowledge) which I think is what Dito appreciates about them.

For example, two plus two will always equal four, the sum of the areas of the two squares on the legs of a right angle triangle always equals the area of the square on the hypotenuse, and a hydrogen atom will always have one proton.

This is not the case with art. We cannot absolutely define any one thing as beautiful or good or tragic. It all depends, and what it almost completely depends on is human emotion and thought.

But once again, two plus two will equal four no matter what we think. That's what make the two different.

This is true at the basic levels, but once you get into the higher levels of science, while proofs are absolutely evident, finding them requires creativity. This is precisely where most of our education currently fails ... and why, historically, we have excelled. Because in the past, we have embraced both the hard facts AND the creative process equally.

To be excellent in art, you need to understand a bit of science ... or at least the processes of science.

To be excellent in science, art is critical to developing the mind (REAL art ... not that "cut and paste"/color in the lines garbage too many elementary schools pass of as "art").

I take it then that you are not a professional artist. Nor is Ditocoaf. While many different artists will tell you many different things, most of them just don't want to pull away the curtain to reveal the wizard.

There is a method to creating work, and there is a very definite method for distilling quality out of one's work.

There are plenty of unsuccessful and horrible artists who don't understand that.

I agree. Take a creative writer for instance. There is the right way and there are many wrong ways. For a creative story to be successful, there are certain methods to which the writer must exercise inorder that people will read past the first page. As for other arts, I have no idea.

There certainly are many more bad writers than good ones, no doubt. But, an excellent writer (as opposed to a good one) is often the one who can break the rules.

Of course, to do that successfully, it helps to know the rules beforehand.. : )

That, I am told is true for both writing and the other artforms.